CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine: an efficacy and tolerability comparison with standard prophylactic drugs

• Published in: Journal of headache and pain Vol. 22; no. 1; p. 128
• Main Authors: Vandervorst, Fenne, Van Deun, Laura, Van Dycke, Annelies, Paemeleire, Koen, Reuter, Uwe, Schoenen, Jean, Versijpt, Jan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Milan Springer Milan 01.12.2021; Springer Nature B.V; BMC
• Subjects: Adverse events; Calcitonin; Calcitonin gene-related peptide; Chronic migraine; Clinical trials; Drugs; Episodic migraine; Headache; Internal Medicine; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Migraine; Monoclonal antibodies; Monoclonal antibody; Neurology; Pain Medicine; Placebos; Prevention; Preventive treatment; Research Article; Chronic migraine; Calcitonin gene-related peptide; Preventive treatment; Monoclonal antibody; Episodic migraine; Migraine
• ISSN: 1129-2369; 1129-2377
• DOI: 10.1186/s10194-021-01335-2

Background Several drugs are available for the preventive treatment of both episodic and chronic migraine. The choice of which therapy to initiate first, second, or third is not straightforward and is based on multiple factors, including general efficacy, tolerability, potential for serious adverse events, comorbid conditions, and costs. Recently, a new class of migraine preventive drugs was introduced, i.e. monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor. Methods The present article summarizes the evidence gathered with this new migraine preventive drug class from randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials. It further puts this into perspective next to the evidence gained by the most widely used agents for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine with an emphasis on efficacy and the robustness with which this efficacy signal was obtained. Results Although being a relatively new class of migraine preventive drugs, monoclonal antibodies blocking the CGRP pathway have an efficacy which is at least comparable if not higher than those of the currently used preventive drugs. Moreover, the robustness of this efficacy signal is substantiated by several randomized clinical trials each including large numbers of patients. In addition, because of their excellent tolerability and with long-term safety data emerging, they seem to have an unprecedented efficacy over adverse effect profile, clearly resulting in an added value for migraine prevention. Conclusions Balancing the data presented in the current manuscript with additional data concerning long term safety on the one hand and cost issues on the other hand, can be of particular use to health policy makers to implement this new drug class in the prevention of migraine.